Get PJ Media on your Apple

PJM Lifestyle

Martin Luther King’s Discriminatory Dream

Discriminate | dis·crim·i·nate | [v. dih-skrim-uh-neyt] To judge according to the content of character.

by
Walter Hudson

Bio

January 20, 2014 - 5:59 am
YouTube Preview Image

Take the time to listen to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s famous “I Have a Dream” speech today. Then ask yourself where his message would fit in today’s political discourse.

He references the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. He pleads for real justice, the abolition of force-wielding institutions of racial segregation, not the false “social justice” of material provision. He explicitly condemns hatred and violence, recognizing whites as “brothers and sisters.” Most powerfully, he concludes with the exhortation to “let freedom ring!”

Who among those laying claim to King’s legacy sound like him today? Who among the organized Left advocates for objective freedom and true justice? Who rejects hatred and fosters the healing of racial divides? Al Sharpton? Jesse Jackson? Van Jones? Barack Obama? Who?

The truth, laid bare for the discerning to see, is that those who most vocally lay claim to King’s legacy fundamentally reject his noble dream. Recall that quote most cited whenever King is evoked:

I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will no longer be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.

Consider what such a nation requires. In order to judge someone by the content of his character, you must remain free to do so and to act upon that judgment in pursuit of your own happiness. Effectively, you must be free to discriminate, to judge this as right and that as wrong, to deem one person good and another bad. Liberty proves foundational to King’s dream. Yet those laying claim to King’s legacy stand opposed to liberty at every turn.

We cannot force individuals to judge others by the content of their character. Any attempt to do so, any attempt to abolish racism by state decree, will fail on account of its ignoring the primacy of choice in the formation of values. King’s dream can only be achieved through persuasion, by appealing to reason and securing individual consent. Consequently, the world necessary to foster racial harmony counter-intuitively must tolerate offensive attitudes and choices.

True, under liberty we may never reach the ideal. But we’ll come a hell of a lot closer than under any other condition.

Walter Hudson advocates for individual rights, serving on the boards of the Republican Liberty Caucus of Minnesota, Minnesota Majority and the Minority Liberty Alliance. He maintains a blog and daily podcast entitled Fightin Words. He also contributes to True North, a hub of conservative Minnesotan commentary, and regularly appears on the Twin Cities News Talk Weekend Roundtable on KTCN AM 1130. Follow his work via Twitter and Facebook.

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
In the absence of character, the content is going to be fraudulently portrayed.

In King's Dream, it was not the bad people that concerned him, it was the appalling silence of the good people. For tyranny takes place most viciously in the face of the silence against it.

It was not as appalling to King that some vermin existed, but that people who should have been disgusted by it, averted their gaze, held their tongues and stood on the sidelines.

ALL tyranny of every brand and stripe, whether personal or collective...is advanced when good people allow it to grow strength in their name and do nothing to divorce from it.

Unless and until those who should oppose it stand with those who are inflicted by it, it will continue unabated...and it should be stated plainly...encouraged.

Today we stand as the victims of tyranny that is growing and encouraged. Content of character is not a measurement, it is in fact an irrelevance. Truth is an irrelevance. Honor is an irrelevance.

If you oppose the tyranny today, you stand in the chamber of the appalling silence...and have nothing left...but a Dream.
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
Nobody's character is unimpeachable, Kathy. Blacks had some serious gripes circa 1963 and King put his name on the line and neck on the block in dealing with them.

His speech -- it was his mouth that uttered the words -- is one of the great ones and we should throw it in the face of the progressives and hate-breeding "community organizers" every chance we get.
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (20)
All Comments   (20)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
Race And Truth

Any discussion of race raises several, legitimate questions, including the following:

1) What is a “race”? The answer does exist and lies with science not politics.

2) What is a “racist”? The answer does exist and lies with linguistics not politics.

3) What is “discrimination”? How does it differ from bigotry, prejudice, and bias? The answers do exist and lie with both linguistics and science.

4) Are there legitimate, scientific reasons for discriminating among the races? If so, should we? If yes, why? Admittedly, the Gospel according to John 8:32 tells us that we shall know the truth, and the truth will make us free; nevertheless, theology aside, would such scientific reasons be compatible with the United States Constitution or even synergistic?

Ideologues of more than one stripe would have us avoid asking these kinds of questions and would punish anyone who tries to answer them. Cannot a case be made that these ideologues do others and themselves a disservice, including those whom they claim to be protecting?

Refusing to tolerate adversaries’ arguments and punishing those adversaries personally for stating them only strengthens their cases. After all, ideological zealots might kidnap the truth, but, in the end, they cannot kill it. Let each of us (including Communists, Democrats, KKK-men, Libertarians, Nazis, Republicans, Socialists, Zionists, etc.), therefore, state his argument . . . reasoned, well put, and scientific . . . with discretion or without . . . then let the truth set us all free (www.inescapableconsequences.com).
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
my buddy's aunt makes $81 an hour on the computer . She has been fired for six months but last month her paycheck was $18695 just working on the computer for a few hours. over here.......... http://www.works12.com
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
Bigotry is an irrational intolerance of others based on skin color or other unimportant attribute - irrational discrimination.

Judgement is the rational intolerance of others based on the content of their unpleasant or dangerous character - rational discrimination.

34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
If the content of the person's character is deficient, the color of their skin is irrelevant.
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
King's egalitarian solution, colorblindness, is today laughed at by the new generation of black activists as part of the problem. That's a sure sign of folks who want to keep the complaint machine alive and well.

Ta-Nehisi Coates uses his usual double talk to deride the recent Neal Brennan interview about Brennan's one-time partner Dave Chapelle. Coates has no interest in solutions about getting along. Coates literally earns a living on keeping racial tensions alive. No tensions, no career. Coates represents the new generation of black activists who say the solution is for over 200 million whites to stop being racists. Black folks are already there and patiently waiting for white folks to become civilized.

Coates himself is proof that is BS. If Coates' writing career had to reflect content of character, he'd have no career, since his one discernible talent is demagoguery. In fact, the new generation of black activists reject the only true solution, and so they'll have careers until the sun dies.
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
"Can any fair-minded citizen deny that the Negro has been deprived? Few people reflect that for two centuries the Negro was enslaved, and robbed of any wages—potential accrued wealth which would have been the legacy of his descendants. All of America’s wealth today could not adequately compensate its Negroes for his centuries of exploitation and humiliation. It is an economic fact that a program such as I propose would certainly cost far less than any computation of two centuries of unpaid wages plus accumulated interest. In any case, I do not intend that this program of economic aid should apply only to the Negro; it should benefit the disadvantaged of all races.

Within common law, we have ample precedents for special compensatory programs, which are regarded as settlements. American Indians are still being paid for land in a settlement manner. Is not two centuries of labor, which helped to build this country, as real a commodity? Many other easily applicable precedents are readily at hand: our child labor laws, social security, unemployment compensation, man-power retraining programs. And you will remember that America adopted a policy of special treatment for her millions of veterans after the War—a program which cost far more than a policy of preferential treatment to rehabilitate the traditionally disadvantaged Negro would cost today.

The closest analogy is the GI Bill of Rights. Negro rehabilitation in America would require approximately the same breadth of program—which would not place an undue burden on our economy. Just as was the case with the returning soldier, such a bill for the disadvantaged and impoverished could enable them to buy homes without cash, at lower and easier repayment terms. They could negotiate loans from banks to launch businesses. They could receive, as did ex-GIs, special points to place them ahead in competition for civil service jobs. Under certain circumstances of physical disability, medical care and long-term financial grants could be made available. And together with these rights, a favorable social climate could be created to encourage the preferential employment of the disadvantaged, as was the case for so many years with veterans. During those years, it might be noted, there was no appreciable resentment of the preferential treatment being given to the special group. America was only compensating her veterans for their time lost from school or from business."

http://www.alex-haley.com/alex_haley_martin_luther_king_interview.htm
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
we had a giant speak, and now we get pygmies and mental midgets, charlatans and hucksters, that promote a word, and ignore the meanings and the message.

And today B.O. still speaks that people don't like him because he is half black, and ignores that they don't like him because his policies are bad, and because he is an unvetter, affirmative action hire, who by his own words is unpatriotic, irresponsible and a failure.
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
People don't like him in spite of his color. They don't like him because he is half a man - half black, half Muslim, half socialist, half communist, half fascist - the list goes on and on. He wouldn't let an adult child play pro-football. He thinks that since he will paying for the kid's health insurance until the kid is 26 he also ought to be able to control the kid's career.
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
In the absence of character, the content is going to be fraudulently portrayed.

In King's Dream, it was not the bad people that concerned him, it was the appalling silence of the good people. For tyranny takes place most viciously in the face of the silence against it.

It was not as appalling to King that some vermin existed, but that people who should have been disgusted by it, averted their gaze, held their tongues and stood on the sidelines.

ALL tyranny of every brand and stripe, whether personal or collective...is advanced when good people allow it to grow strength in their name and do nothing to divorce from it.

Unless and until those who should oppose it stand with those who are inflicted by it, it will continue unabated...and it should be stated plainly...encouraged.

Today we stand as the victims of tyranny that is growing and encouraged. Content of character is not a measurement, it is in fact an irrelevance. Truth is an irrelevance. Honor is an irrelevance.

If you oppose the tyranny today, you stand in the chamber of the appalling silence...and have nothing left...but a Dream.
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
It doesn't have to be just a dream, CFB. If only there was a group of dynamic leaders out there who had all that it would take (courage, funding, principles, a PLAN) to forge a real fight against the enemy. It has to be a recipe though including ALL of these things to succeed.
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
bobbcat

As long as Propaganda is the mass messaging norm, and as long as good people stand idly by....dynamic leaders will find it nearly impossible to not be slandered out of the race before it gains traction.
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
What do you suggest that the good people do? It takes money, lots of it, to even make oneself heard, let alone get a grip on the mantle of the narrative.

I hope & pray that Mark Levin's book The Liberty Amendments will spark enough inspiration among a large enough number of people who will see the ways to set into motion the creation of the foundation upon which a valiant fight can be waged. This will take many years though, of course.
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
I suggest...outrage.

I am amazed at the lack of outrage in the face of tyranny. Those who should oppose it...every man and woman of honor...don't need money. They need to coalesce. Come together and resist.

Pull all support from the purveyors of tyranny and their enablers. Boycott, resist, announce your resistance...and call out people for their silence.

Do not go to movies in support of tyranny, watch TV shows in support of tyranny or buy products that enable tyranny.

Link arms and resist. And insist that OUR side...be heard.
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
"Who among the organized Left advocates for objective freedom and true justice?"

You guys have to stop using the enemy's language. Who among the statists advocates for objective freedom and true justice? None, because they are statists. They worship the State. They support the elimination of individual rights (true freedom) and the elimination of the notion that the State exists to protect those rights (true justice).

Left and Right are meaningless phrases. Call them what they are.
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
Dr. Alveda King: Part of My Uncle's Dream Came True Today

Martin Luther King III, his wife, Arndrea King, and daughter, Yolanda, wave from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. (Getty Images)

http://www.newsmax.com/US/MLK-Dream-March-Anniversary/2013/08/24/id/522075

MLK " Last Speech" 1968

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98k-pjN6nl0
34 weeks ago
34 weeks ago Link To Comment
1 2 Next View All